Astroturfing is the deceptive practice of hiding the sponsors of an orchestrated message or organization to make it appear as though it originates from, and is supported by, unsolicited grassroots participants. It is a practice intended to give the statements or organizations credibility by withholding information about the source's financial backers.

The implication behind the use of the term is that instead of a "true" or "natural" grassroots effort behind the activity in question, there is a "fake" or "artificial" appearance of support. It is increasingly recognized as a problem in social media, e-commerce, and politics. Astroturfing can influence public opinion by flooding platforms like political blogs, news sites, and review websites with manipulated content. Some groups accused of astroturfing argue that they are legitimately helping citizen activists to make their voices heard.

Various detection methods have been developed by researchers, including content analysis, linguistic analysis, authorship attribution, and machine learning.

Etymology The word "grassroots" describes a natural, self-organizing movement run by the community. AstroTurf is a brand of artificial turf (grass); "astroturf" describes an artificial grassroots movement. The usage of the term "astroturf" is credited to former Treasury Secretary of the United States Lloyd Bentsen who, in 1985, when faced with a barrage of postcards and letters facilitated by insurance companies claiming to be concerned constituents, said that "a fellow from Texas can tell the difference between grass roots and Astroturf", referencing the brand of artificial grass.

Definition In political science, it is defined as the process of seeking electoral victory or legislative relief for grievances by helping political actors find and mobilize a sympathetic public, and is designed to create the image of public consensus where there is none. Astroturfing is the use of fake grassroots efforts that primarily focus on influencing public opinion and typically are funded by corporations and political entities to form opinions.

On the internet, "astroturfers" use software to hide their identity. Sometimes one individual operates through many personas to give the impression of widespread support for their client's agenda. Some studies suggest astroturfing can alter public viewpoints and create enough doubt to inhibit action. In the first systematic study of astroturfing in the United States, Oxford Professor Philip N. Howard argued that the internet was making it much easier for powerful lobbyists and political movements to activate small groups of aggrieved citizens to have an exaggerated importance in public policy debates. Astroturfed accounts on social media do not always require humans to write their posts; one January 2021 study detailed a "set of human-looking bot accounts" used to post political content, which was able to operate automatically for fourteen days (and make 1,586 posts) before being detected and suspended by Twitter. Twitter trends are often targeted by astroturfing as they are used as a proxy for popularity. A study conducted by researchers at EPFL reported that 20% of the global Twitter trends in 2019 were fake, created automatically using fake and compromised accounts which tweet in a coordinated way to mimic grassroots organizing of regular Twitter users.

Policies and enforcement Many countries have laws that prohibit more overt astroturfing practices. In the United States, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) may send cease-and-desist orders or require a fine of $16,000 per day for those that violate its "Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising". The FTC's guides were updated in 2009 to address social media and word-of-mouth marketing. According to an article in the Journal of Consumer Policy, the FTC's guides holds advertisers responsible for ensuring bloggers or product endorsers comply with the guides, and any product endorsers with a material connection are required to provide honest reviews.

In the European Union, the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive requires that paid-for editorial content in the media provide a clear disclosure that the content is a sponsored advertisement. Additionally, it prohibits those with a material connection from misleading readers into thinking they are a regular consumer.

The United Kingdom has the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations, which prohibits "Falsely representing oneself as a consumer." They allow for up to two years in prison and unlimited fines for breaches. Additionally, the advertising industry in the UK has adopted many voluntary policies, such as the Code of Non-Broadcast Advertising, Sale, Promotion and Direct Marketing. A trade association, the Advertising Standards Authority, investigates complaints of breaches. The policy requires that marketing professionals not mislead their audience, including by omitting a disclosure of their material connection.

In Australia, astroturfing is regulated by Section 18 of the Australian Consumer Law, which broadly prohibits "misleading and deceptive conduct". According to the Journal of Consumer Policy, Australia's laws, which were introduced in 1975, are more vague. In most cases, they are enforced through lawsuits from competitors, rather than the regulatory body, the Australian Competition & Consumer Commission. There is also an International Consumer Protection and Enforcement Network (ICPEN).

Legal regulations are primarily targeted towards testimonials, endorsements and statements as to the performance or quality of a product. Employees of an organization may be considered acting as customers if their actions are not guided by authority within the company.

In October 2018, after denying that they had paid for people to show up in support of a controversial power plant development project in New Orleans, Entergy was fined five million dollars for using astroturf firm The Hawthorn Group to provide actors to prevent real community members' voices from being counted at city council meetings and show false grassroots support.Mazza, Juliana (October 30, 2018). "Report: Entergy Knew It Was Paying for Actors at Not 1, but 2 Meetings ." WDSU. Retrieved from WDSU.com, February 3, 2019.

Debate

Effectiveness

In the book Grassroots for Hire: Public Affairs Consultants in American Democracy, Edward Walker defines "astroturfing" as public participation that is perceived as heavily invented, as fraudulent (claims are attributed to those who did not make such statements), or as an elite campaign masquerading as a mass movement. Although not all campaigns by professional grassroots lobbying consultants meet this definition, the book finds that the elite-sponsored grassroots campaigns often fail when they are not transparent about their sources of sponsorship and/or fail to develop partnerships with constituencies that have an independent interest in the issue. Walker highlights the case of Working Families for Wal-Mart, in which the campaign's lack of transparency led to its demise.

A study published in the Journal of Business Ethics examined the effects of websites operated by front groups on students. It found that astroturfing was effective at creating uncertainty and lowering trust about claims, thereby changing perceptions that tend to favor the business interests behind the astroturfing effort. The New York Times reported that "consumer" reviews are more effective, because "they purport to be testimonials of real people, even though some are bought and sold just like everything else on the commercial Internet." Some organizations feel that their business is threatened by negative comments, so they may engage in astroturfing to drown them out. Online comments from astroturfing employees can also sway the discussion through the influence of groupthink.

Justification Some astroturfing operatives defend their practice. Regarding "movements that have organized aggressively to exaggerate their sway", author Ryan Sager said that this "isn't cheating. Doing everything in your power to get your people to show up is basic politics." According to a Porter/Novelli executive, "There will be times when the position you advocate, no matter how well framed and supported, will not be accepted by the public simply because you are who you are."

Groups like FreedomWorks and Americans for Prosperity assert that providing organizational structure and support to grassroots movements is essential for effective advocacy. They argue that the concept of grassroots movements being entirely spontaneous is unrealistic and that some level of organization is necessary to amplify voices and mobilize supporters effectively. These groups claim that their activities are legitimate and that they are simply providing the necessary backbone for authentic activism.

Impact on society Data-mining expert Bing Liu (University of Illinois Chicago) estimated that one-third of all consumer reviews on the Internet are fake. According to The New York Times, this has made it hard to tell the difference between "popular sentiment" and "manufactured public opinion". According to an article in the Journal of Business Ethics, astroturfing threatens the legitimacy of genuine grassroots movements. The authors argued that astroturfing that is "purposefully designed to fulfill corporate agendas, manipulate public opinion and harm scientific research represents a serious lapse in ethical conduct." A 2011 report found that often paid posters from competing companies are attacking each other in forums and overwhelming regular participants in the process. George Monbiot said that persona-management software supporting astroturfing "could destroy the Internet as a forum for constructive debate". An article in the Journal of Consumer Policy said that regulators and policy makers needed to be more aggressive about astroturfing. The author said that it undermines the public's ability to inform potential customers of sub-standard products or inappropriate business practices, but also noted that fake reviews were difficult to detect.

Techniques Use of one or more front groups is one astroturfing technique. These groups typically present themselves as serving the public interest, while actually working on behalf of a corporate or political sponsor. Front groups may resist legislation and scientific consensus that is damaging to the sponsor's business by emphasizing minority viewpoints, instilling doubt and publishing counterclaims by corporate-sponsored experts. Fake blogs can also be created that appear to be written by consumers, while actually being operated by a commercial or political interest. Some political movements have provided incentives for members of the public to send a letter to the editor at their local paper, often using a copy and paste form letter that is published in dozens of newspapers verbatim. Mass letters may be printed on personalized stationery using different typefaces, colors and words to make them appear personal.

Another technique is the use of sockpuppets, where a single person creates multiple identities online to give the appearance of grassroots support. Sockpuppets may post positive reviews about a product, attack participants that criticize the organization, or post negative reviews and comments about competitors, under fake identities."Company Settles With State Attorney General Over Fake Online Customer Reviews." Computer & Internet Lawyer 26.10 (2009): 32. Computers & Applied Sciences Complete. Web. 11 November 2012. Astroturfing businesses may pay staff based on the number of posts they make that are not flagged by moderators. Persona management software may be used so that each paid poster can manage five to seventy convincing online personas without getting them confused. Online astroturfing using sockpuppets is a form of Sybil attack against distributed systems.